Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Implementing the Mandates Imposed on Covered Entities By Section 1557 of the ACA
Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is the anti-discrimination component of the ACA that prohibits discrimination in specified federally funded health care programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability. Section 1557 supplements pre-existing anti-discrimination laws and was designed for the purpose of enhancing access to health care and health care coverage to members of the patient population whose access has been impeded by discrimination.
Section 1557 breaks new ground in that it is the first federal civil rights law to ban sex discrimination in health care programs and activities. In this context, sex discrimination encompasses, but is not limited to, discrimination predicated upon a person's sex, including pregnancy and related medical conditions, termination of pregnancy, gender identity and sex stereotypes. The statute's broad reach encompasses all health programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance from the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); all health programs and activities administered by entities created under Title I of the ACA; and all health programs and activities administered by HHS (for example, the Medicare Program and federally-facilitated marketplaces). These entities are collectively referred to as “Covered Entities.”
Section 1557 imposes requirements on Covered Entities in order to achieve the objectives of the statute. This article discusses those obligations and the consequences of a Covered Entity's failure to fulfill those mandates.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?